HP 810-311nl

Performance Results

Benchmarks - missing SSD
Gaming
Gaming 10%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 68%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 8%
Tree trunk
PC StatusOverall this PC is performing as expected (42nd percentile). This means that out of 100 PCs with exactly the same components, 58 performed better. The overall PC percentile is the average of each of its individual components.
ProcessorWith a good single core score, this CPU can easily handle the majority of general computing tasks. Additionally this processor can handle very light workstation, and even some very light server workloads. Finally, with a gaming score of 72.8%, this CPU's suitability for 3D gaming is good.
Graphics9.47% is a very low 3D score (RTX 2060S = 100%). This GPU can only handle very basic 3D games but it's fine for general computing tasks.
Boot DriveThe boot partition is located on a mechanical or hybrid drive. Moving the system to an SSD will yield far faster boot times, better system responsiveness and faster application load times.
Memory16GB is enough RAM to run any version of Windows and it's more than sufficient for nearly all games. 16GB also allows for very large file and system caches, software development and batch photo editing/processing.
OS VersionAlthough Windows 10 is not the most recent version of Windows, it remains a great option.
High background CPU (27%). High background CPU reduces benchmark accuracy. How to reduce background CPU.
SystemHP 810-311nl  (all builds)
MotherboardHewlett-Packard 2AF3
Memory9.3 GB free of 16 GB @ 1.6 GHz
Display1920 x 1080 - 32 Bit colori
OSWindows 10
BIOS Date20141024
Uptime48.2 Days
Run DateJul 14 '23 at 14:43
Run Duration271 Seconds
Run User ITA-User
Background CPU 27%

 PC Performing as expected (42nd percentile)

Actual performance vs. expectations. The graphs show user score (x) vs user score frequency (y).

Processor BenchNormalHeavyServer
Intel Core i7-4790-$135
SOCKET 0, 1 CPU, 4 cores, 8 threads
Base clock 3.6 GHz, turbo 3.75 GHz (avg)
Performing as expected (60th percentile)
72.8% Very good
Memory 80.2
1-Core 104
2-Core 202
73% 129 Pts
4-Core 356
8-Core 494
54% 425 Pts
64-Core 508
32% 508 Pts
Poor: 58%
This bench: 72.8%
Great: 80%
Graphics Card Bench3D DX93D DX103D DX11
Nvidia GTX 745 (OEM)-$60
HP(103C 6893) ≥ 4GB
CLim: 1032 MHz, MLim: 450 MHz, Ram: 4GB, Driver: 531.30
Performing as expected (51st percentile)
9.47% Terrible
Lighting 11.3
Reflection 14.5
Parallax 58.5
9% 28.1 fps
MRender 10.3
Gravity 12.4
Splatting 13.3
10% 12 fps
Poor: 9%
This bench: 9.47%
Great: 10%
Drives BenchSequentialRandom 4kDeep queue 4k
WD Blue 1TB (2012)-$39
245GB free (System drive)
Firmware: 03.01A03
SusWrite @10s intervals: 7.2 13 11 10 13 11 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (1st percentile)
18% Very poor
Read 52
Write 16.2
Mixed 21.4
SusWrite 10.8
18% 25.1 MB/s
4K Read 0.4
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0
17% 0.13 MB/s
Poor: 52%
This bench: 18%
Great: 109%
Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 2TB-$37
1TB free
Firmware: CC25
SusWrite @10s intervals: 85 92 91 91 90 88 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
72.6% Very good
Read 164
Write 123
Mixed 75.3
SusWrite 89.4
83% 113 MB/s
4K Read 0.6
4K Write 1.8
4K Mixed 0.7
136% 1.03 MB/s
Poor: 51%
This bench: 72.6%
Great: 114%
WD Red 2TB (2012)-$82
568GB free
Firmware: 82.00A82
SusWrite @10s intervals: 97 100 95 99 100 92 MB/s
Performing below expectations (21st percentile)
54.9% Above average
Read 94.5
Write 93.8
Mixed 30.2
SusWrite 97.2
57% 78.9 MB/s
4K Read 0.7
4K Write 0.4
4K Mixed 0.4
81% 0.5 MB/s
Poor: 45%
This bench: 54.9%
Great: 86%
TOSHIBA External USB 3.0 1TB
432GB free, PID a202
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 84 87 85 87 87 84 MB/s
Performing as expected (58th percentile)
36.2% Below average
Read 83.9
Write 84.2
Mixed 32.7
SusWrite 85.8
95% 71.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 1.7
4K Mixed 0.7
84% 0.97 MB/s
Poor: 14%
This bench: 36.2%
Great: 49%
TOSHIBA External USB 3.0 2TB
1TB free, PID a202
Operating at USB 3.0 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 121 124 122 123 123 121 MB/s
Performing way above expectations (97th percentile)
50.4% Above average
Read 121
Write 123
Mixed 45.8
SusWrite 122
137% 103 MB/s
4K Read 0.5
4K Write 2
4K Mixed 0.8
97% 1.1 MB/s
Poor: 15%
This bench: 50.4%
Great: 49%
TOSHIBA External USB 3.0 1TB
237GB free, PID a200
Operating at USB 2.1 Speed
SusWrite @10s intervals: 24 25 25 25 25 24 MB/s
Performing way below expectations (8th percentile)
13.9% Very poor
Read 57.7
Write 21.9
Mixed 18.7
SusWrite 24.6
36% 30.7 MB/s
4K Read 0.9
4K Write 0
4K Mixed 0.6
24% 0.5 MB/s
Poor: 13%
This bench: 13.9%
Great: 44%
Memory Kit BenchMulti coreSingle coreLatency
Micron 16JTF1G64AZ-1G6E1 2x8GB
2 of 4 slots used
16GB DIMM DDR3 clocked @ 1600 MHz
Performing above expectations (61st percentile)
55.6% Above average
MC Read 20.2
MC Write 20.7
MC Mixed 16.6
55% 19.2 GB/s
SC Read 15.2
SC Write 20.6
SC Mixed 18.8
52% 18.2 GB/s
Latency 80.2
50% 80.2 ns
Poor: 30%
This bench: 55.6%
Great: 60%

 System Memory Latency Ladder

L1/L2/L3 CPU cache and main memory (DIMM) access latencies in nano seconds

Typical 810-311nl Builds (Compare 6 builds) See popular component choices, score breakdowns and rankings
Gaming
Gaming 12%
Tree trunk
Desktop
Desktop 70%
Battle cruiser
Workstation
Workstation 11%
Tree trunk

System: HP 810-311nl

EDIT WITH CUSTOM PC BUILDER Value: 65% - Good Total price: $223
Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?
Marketing teams operate large numbers of reddit accounts. When UserBenchmark’s data contradicts their marketing spiel, they deflect by systematically attacking our reputation.
Why don’t large PC brands support UserBenchmark?
PC brands make a large proportion lot of their profit from flagship hardware sales (4090, 14900KS, 7950X3D etc.). UserBenchmark's data helps consumers to choose hardware that offers similar real world performance at a fraction of the cost.
Why don’t any youtubers promote UserBenchmark?
We don't sponsor youtubers, so they have no incentive to make positive content about us. In addition, the brands with weaker products tend to spend more on youtube marketing, which puts their youtubers at odds with UserBenchmark.
Why does UserBenchmark have so many negative trustpilot reviews?
Trustpilot hosts user-generated reviews in an online community that's open and accessible to all. Looking at its 200+ UserBenchmark reviews, which are mostly written by virgin accounts, it is glaringly obvious that they were created by a marketing team. Real users don’t have any time or interest to promote one brand over another.
Why is UserBenchmark so popular with users?
Instead of trying to win lucrative sponsorship deals with billion dollar PC brands, we have spent the last 13 years 100% focussed on providing comprehensive, accurate and relevant information for our users. As a result, most of our users return over and over again because collectively they save millions of dollars every year.
The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-12600K $159Nvidia RTX 4060 $280Crucial MX500 250GB $39
Intel Core i5-12400F $120Nvidia RTX 4060-Ti $385Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $80
Intel Core i5-13600K $260Nvidia RTX 4070 $550Samsung 870 Evo 250GB $45
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $40SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $39Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $48SanDisk Extreme 32GB $28
Seagate Barracuda 2TB (2016) $62G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $351SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
If you make a purchase via one of these links, our site may earn a commission
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer  •  YouTube Feedback